Consultation opens on Pear Tree Road crossing scheme

Cllrs Brian Allinson (left) and Ben Walker on Pear Tree Road, Bradley Stoke

Residents in Bradley Stoke are being asked to comment on a proposed raised zebra crossing to make walking to school safer for local children.

The 2011 Travel Plan for Holy Trinity Primary School has identified an increase in the number of drivers failing to stop at the zebra crossing outside the school on Pear Tree Road [Street View].

Speed surveys taken on Pear Tree Road in the vicinity of the school also identify vehicle speeds greater that 30mph.

The Travel Plan states that pupils are discouraged from walking to school due to the lack of safe places to cross the roads.

In May 2010, South Gloucestershire Council (SGC) received a petition from the school and parents highlighting these concerns.

Bradley Stoke’s Mayor – and now District Councillor for Bradley Stoke North (since May) – Ben Walker organised a site meeting with the Council’s transport chief, Cllr Brian Allinson, to explore what could be done, including the possibility of creating a raised zebra crossing.

Funding for this scheme was then agreed by councillors at a Southern Brooks Area Forum meeting in March 2011 after having heard from Cllr Walker at the meeting about the need for action.

Commenting on the consultation that has now started, Cllr Ben Walker (Con, Bradley Stoke North) said:

“The school and local parents have done a great job in highlighting this local road safety issue and I was pleased to be able to support their efforts in securing funding.”

“There can be no justification for speeding drivers who fail to stop at this crossing, particularly when pupils are crossing on their way to and from school – something needs to be done.”

“Now that the consultation on this scheme has started, I would encourage residents to respond so the council knows the strength of local feeling there is on the need for action.”

The consultation ends on Monday 19th September and details can be found on South Gloucestershire Council’s website:

Share this page:


  1. Great,

    Just what we all want. Another raised crossing to annoy the majority of local residents. I would be interested to see some statistics of pedestrian road incidents on this crossing and others in Bradley Stoke. You’d probably find that it is fact house fires/incidents that cause most injuries/fatalities to children and their families. Perhaps we should waste £26k on educating people how to use their ovens properly or not to smoke in bed or just generally not to be an idiot instead of raising a crossing because people are either incapable of crossing a road properly or supervising their children correctly.

    Surely a lollipop lady/man would be a better alternative? Cheaper to bring in for 2 hours a day. It would give an elderly person something to do, save on long term maintenance of a crossing etc and everyone would be able to say “Hello Bert” in the morning and afternoon and comment on what a nice community we live in.

    Lets put it another way, if some fool is going to go speeding along and run over people on a crossing because they’re not paying attention, they will do so regardless of whether it’s raised, fluorescent orange or simply has an old man called Bert holding a stop sign.

    Now can someone arrange to spend £24k on putting a sticker through my door to remind me not to burn my house down?

  2. They just love wasting our money don’t they?

    The problem is as soon as the magic words “travel plan”, “speeding” and “children” are used those in charge of spending wet themselves and won’t want to be the ones who would turn down the spending for fear of being seen to condone speeding.

    Let’s see the facts, how many speeding drivers, how many pedestrians and how many prosecutions have taken place. But we all know this “consultation” won’t change a thing. It’s a done deal as was shown in the consultation for the same raised crossing on Brook Way.

    A reduced amount of money would be better spent repainting the white and double yellow lines in that area, or stick up some 20mph signs and get the police there with some real speed cameras.

  3. It’s great to see our mayor claiming credit for something he has played no part in!

    The proposed improvements to the crossing was achieved by the parents of children at Holy Trinity School joining together, organising a petition and going along to the Southern Brooks Area Forum and speaking in support of the proposals.

    I, as the local councillor at the time, help the school to update its Travel Plan, advised and supported the parents and also spoke at the said meeting to achieve the funding now being consulted on.

    Mr Politically Incorrect is obviously not a parent of a young child and somehow oblivious of the need to have a safe crossing so that some of the older children can be independent and use the crossing without fear of being run over. There are stats showing that a large number of vehicles exceed 30mph and more frequently 40mph and occasionally 50mph.

    Anon-e-mous does make some sensible points, but we need a long term solution to the problem, not a short sharp shock.

    A raised crossing is a permanent solution to this problem and is a one-off cost. This type of traffic calming has been shown to work throughout then country and they’re hell of a lot better than the speed humps we have through the town.

  4. Totally agree with JonBoy as a raised platform is far cheaper than regularly employing a police officer with a speed gun to catch the maniacs who race down the road at rush hour or from their offices at lunchtime! I’d be happy to borrow a speedgun from the police to prove it…

    As a motorbiker, I find the Brook Way platform superior to the metal pyramids as safer for me – and it does slow traffic unlike the pyramids. Makes it obvious there is a crossing as we have a high proportion of dopey drivers who can’t remember the Highway Code.

    20 MPH zone also good idea. Sadly drivers do hit lollipop persons!

    Schools invest a lot of time in travel plans to encourage kids to walk or cycle to work – and I’ve seen enough idiots on that stretch of road to support Holy Trinity.

  5. @Jonboy, I would love to see these so-called stats. As a resident near the raised crossing on Brook Way, I see no difference whatsoever in throwing a bit of extra tarmac down, yet again wasting precious local funds. Drivers aren’t stupid, they are reckless, and it if they want to speed then they will be immediately wise to the fact that you can still maintain excessive speed driving over these crossings. A teenager driving out his or her clapped out Ford Fiesta will find it fun to hit those at speed and see if they can get airborne. I’ve witnessed that first hand so put those stats to paper!

    I hope you’re proud of being part of a wasteful project. Your lambasting of Mr Politically Incorrect merely shows your ignorance to the wider picture. How have you coped for the years preceding this where no crossing existed? Thanks for selfishly siphoning off local funds and irritating the majority of local residents. The idea of a Lollipop man/woman is perfect. So why don’t you acknowledge that sensible option and concede you’ve made a big mistake?

  6. The problem with the proposed scheme is while it protects kids going to school, it’s still there the other 99% of the time there are no kids and will irritate drivers.

    Lollypop lady or traffic lights are a much better idea – only slows people down when they need slowed.

    Not tbh that I think the kids were at much risk anyway – it’s not a high speed road and the crossing is clearly visible from a distance in both directions. I am not aware of there being many accidents at the crossing. It’s also a load of bull to say that it’s preventing children walking to school.

    Incidentally I have children going to HT school.

  7. The issues here are surely two fold -speed and drivers not stopping at a pedestrian crossing when required to do so. So make Pear Tree Road a 20mph speed limit and if drivers do not stop as required by law at a pedestrian crossing then parents/pedestrians should report them to the police.
    A raised crossing wont solve the latter problem. Most people who use this road are regulars and a speed gun check for a few hours at peak times and school entry/exit times will soon send the message around
    But parents beware because I have on occasions witnessed cars driving excessively fast down Pear Tree Road only to turn into Holy Trinity School to collect children.
    Anyone who lives near a school will tell you that some parents are irresponsible when it comes to driving.Speeding to get to school, causing obstructions and kids with no seat belts on etc
    Good to see that JonBoy hasnt lost his ability to needle the Cons.

  8. Mike L – don’t blame the teens alone for speeding.

    Plenty of the ones I’ve seen are aged 30-55!!

    I would also comment that there are plenty of very stupid drivers; like the ones who drive down Westfield Way every morning with a cup of coffee in their hand. You know who you are x 3…

  9. After driving along Pear Tree today, it would maybe help matters if the council actually bothered to cheek the illumination levels of the two flashing lights on the zebra crossing. Neither are particularly bright, especially the one on the school side of the road.

    Sort that out, along with repainting of the road markings which are rapidly fading and job done.

    But I bet those in charge go for the expensive option. After all, it’s part of “The Plan”

  10. Consultation now over, and as I gave some feedback I got to see the questions, equally I got personal feedback via email.

    I have discovered:
    1) There have been no accidents at that crossing – I asked how many accidents had occurred in my email.
    2) There is no speeding at that crossing – the cars there have been monitored going between 30-35mph. I know this because I proposed a traffic light but that would only be allowed if the cars had been going faster (i.e. speeding).

    So the reality is there’s not a problem.

  11. South Gloucestershire Council’s feedback on the consultation responses:

    Feedback Statement [PDF, 76kB]

    Conclusion: “The legal process to implement the necessary traffic regulations orders will begin in due course with a view of implementation by March 2012.”

  12. So with no hard evidence whatsoever another £20k of our money is thrown away based on heresay and conjecture on the part of a “Travel Plan”.

    Don’t you just love ’em!

Comments are closed.